Stressed council staff "collapsing at work"

JOB losses are putting so much strain on Southend Council staff that some workers have collapsed at work, unions claim.

Southend Council’s Tory administration plans to axe the equivalent of just under 50 full-time posts as part of £7.3million of cuts this year.

Some of the posts are empty, but about 30 staff members’ livelihoods are expected to be at risk.

But Unison, which represents just under half of the Civic Centre’s 1,600 staff, claims many who remain are already having to work 12-hour days to take on the workload of axed posts.

Claire Wormald, secretary of Southend Unison’s local government branch, said: “A lot of people are coming in when they shouldn’t be.

“We know of people who have collapsed at their desks.

“That might sound dramatic, but it’s linked to levels of stress.”

She warned that some social workers were coming in at 7am and staying until 7pm, risking the lives of those for whom they are responsible.

Ms Wormald said: “The outcome for the public is the services they rely on are going to be less reliable because they can’t be sustained. It puts the community at risk as much as our members.”

Staff took more than 2,000 sick days due to mental health reasons, including stress, in 2012, the Echo revealed last year, although sickness is falling.

The number of roles under threat is lower than the 80 full-time- equivalent posts cut this financial year and the 120 in 2012-13, although Unison claims this is because the number of council staff is dwindling.

Council leader Nigel Holdcroft, who outlined the cuts in the coming year’s budget earlier this week, refuted the union’s claims. He said: “The number of job losses is less than we originally feared.

“I do not accept our staff are being unreasonably pressured or the situation is any worse than exists in the public or private sectors across the country.

“We have good systems to provide staff support where necessary and will continue to invest in IT to help our staff to deliver good efficient services.”

Comments (84)

Dont make us all laugh, the Council is one of the most stress free jobs of all time, they should try being Hospital worker School worker, not some pen pusher without any time frames.

Dont make us all laugh, the Council is one of the most stress free jobs of all time, they should try being Hospital worker School worker, not some pen pusher without any time frames.Nowthatsworthknowing

It must be a very tough being in one of the ever increasing non jobs at the council offices! There are too many politically correct positions, outreach workers for every type of minority.so many jobs that never even existed a few years ago that it is now deemed we can't live without.advisers in everything the nanny state.Good on the council for the cuts. I am sorry for anyone to lose their employment, however since when should council jobs be ring fenced against cuts which every other occupation has to suffer.anyway for stress let them be a paramedic or nurse or deal with problem kids.

It must be a very tough being in one of the ever increasing non jobs at the council offices! There are too many politically correct positions, outreach workers for every type of minority.so many jobs that never even existed a few years ago that it is now deemed we can't live without.advisers in everything the nanny state.Good on the council for the cuts. I am sorry for anyone to lose their employment, however since when should council jobs be ring fenced against cuts which every other occupation has to suffer.anyway for stress let them be a paramedic or nurse or deal with problem kids.Thorp55

Thorp55 wrote:
It must be a very tough being in one of the ever increasing non jobs at the council offices! There are too many politically correct positions, outreach workers for every type of minority.so many jobs that never even existed a few years ago that it is now deemed we can't live without.advisers in everything the nanny state.Good on the council for the cuts. I am sorry for anyone to lose their employment, however since when should council jobs be ring fenced against cuts which every other occupation has to suffer.anyway for stress let them be a paramedic or nurse or deal with problem kids.

Sack the lot of 'em make a nice hotel, that civic centre....

[quote][p][bold]Thorp55[/bold] wrote:
It must be a very tough being in one of the ever increasing non jobs at the council offices! There are too many politically correct positions, outreach workers for every type of minority.so many jobs that never even existed a few years ago that it is now deemed we can't live without.advisers in everything the nanny state.Good on the council for the cuts. I am sorry for anyone to lose their employment, however since when should council jobs be ring fenced against cuts which every other occupation has to suffer.anyway for stress let them be a paramedic or nurse or deal with problem kids.[/p][/quote]Sack the lot of 'em make a nice hotel, that civic centre....Nowthatsworthknowing

Being asked to do something probably stressed them out. After all, if so many weren't going Tom & Dick, they'd be falling over each other.

I had an insight to one small Dept. at the council HQ in Southend a few years back.

They had a receptionist. Behind her was an office of almost 20 people. Every 'quota' had been matched and box ticked. They even had some poor fella sat on some sort of machine like Stephen Hawking.

Everyone sat about chatting and not doing very much. Half way through proceedings a tea lady arrived.

Full sized trolley, tea urn, selection of cakes sweets, you name it. Like something from the early seventies The non activity ground to a complete halt for another 20 minutes at this point.

I was astonished. Years ago I had visited an equivalent Dept. elsewhere in the country, in a town similar in size - their headcount for the same function was one person.

Being asked to do something probably stressed them out. After all, if so many weren't going Tom & Dick, they'd be falling over each other.
I had an insight to one small Dept. at the council HQ in Southend a few years back.
They had a receptionist. Behind her was an office of almost 20 people. Every 'quota' had been matched and box ticked. They even had some poor fella sat on some sort of machine like Stephen Hawking.
Everyone sat about chatting and not doing very much. Half way through proceedings a tea lady arrived.
Full sized trolley, tea urn, selection of cakes sweets, you name it. Like something from the early seventies The non activity ground to a complete halt for another 20 minutes at this point.
I was astonished. Years ago I had visited an equivalent Dept. elsewhere in the country, in a town similar in size - their headcount for the same function was one person.RochfordRob

most jobs these days are stressful. I would have thought this was one of the best jobs to be in these days they ought to think themselves very lucky to have one of these cushy numbers. Collapsing at work.....thats pretty easy to fake you just crumble to the floor and claim stress. And no I have never done that myself!

most jobs these days are stressful. I would have thought this was one of the best jobs to be in these days they ought to think themselves very lucky to have one of these cushy numbers. Collapsing at work.....thats pretty easy to fake you just crumble to the floor and claim stress. And no I have never done that myself!drofmor1

Nebs wrote:
1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.

Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!!

It doesn't sound that many when you think of the population in Southend. Not to me anyway.
I seem to recall the hospital has close to 4000 employees for comparison.

[quote][p][bold]johanuk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote:
1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.[/p][/quote]Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!![/p][/quote]It doesn't sound that many when you think of the population in Southend. Not to me anyway.
I seem to recall the hospital has close to 4000 employees for comparison.Keptquiettillnow

Nebs wrote:
1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.

Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!!

It doesn't sound that many when you think of the population in Southend. Not to me anyway.
I seem to recall the hospital has close to 4000 employees for comparison.

[quote][p][bold]johanuk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote:
1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.[/p][/quote]Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!![/p][/quote]It doesn't sound that many when you think of the population in Southend. Not to me anyway.
I seem to recall the hospital has close to 4000 employees for comparison.Keptquiettillnow

What a fantastically ridiculous headline, if they were after any sympathy, they have just blown it. Unison the toothless union and council workers, conjure images of a very slow slug, costing the people thousands, for very little gain.
Swathing cuts are whats needed, with money sewer.

What a fantastically ridiculous headline, if they were after any sympathy, they have just blown it. Unison the toothless union and council workers, conjure images of a very slow slug, costing the people thousands, for very little gain.
Swathing cuts are whats needed, with money sewer.You'dfeelbetterforknowingthat

1) they are public sector workers.
2) They are employed by a Tory administration.

as far as the Tory party are concerned, the foxes that they hunt are of more value to humanity then the human beings that they employ in public service.

As far as the employees are concerned, the working conditions described in the book 1984 would give an accurate incite and would provide use as an orientation and introduction manual to new staff members.

Of course they are collapsing at work.
1) they are public sector workers.
2) They are employed by a Tory administration.
as far as the Tory party are concerned, the foxes that they hunt are of more value to humanity then the human beings that they employ in public service.
As far as the employees are concerned, the working conditions described in the book 1984 would give an accurate incite and would provide use as an orientation and introduction manual to new staff members.jayman

1) they are public sector workers.
2) They are employed by a Tory administration.

as far as the Tory party are concerned, the foxes that they hunt are of more value to humanity then the human beings that they employ in public service.

As far as the employees are concerned, the working conditions described in the book 1984 would give an accurate incite and would provide use as an orientation and introduction manual to new staff members.

please pop your contract of employment into the nearest 'memory hole'

[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote:
Of course they are collapsing at work.
1) they are public sector workers.
2) They are employed by a Tory administration.
as far as the Tory party are concerned, the foxes that they hunt are of more value to humanity then the human beings that they employ in public service.
As far as the employees are concerned, the working conditions described in the book 1984 would give an accurate incite and would provide use as an orientation and introduction manual to new staff members.[/p][/quote]please pop your contract of employment into the nearest 'memory hole'jayman

Nebs wrote:
1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.

Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!!

It doesn't sound that many when you think of the population in Southend. Not to me anyway.
I seem to recall the hospital has close to 4000 employees for comparison.

How many visitors / patients do they administer to on a daily basis at the hospital compared to the 'droves' descending upon the council offices? Much much higher I'd imagine.

At the hospital they are dealing with bodies and lives. At the council offices they are shuffling pieces of paper and trying see who can score the highest on Tetris or updating Facebook all day. (Provided they can cram that in between their tea, coffee and lunch breaks.)

If you cannot manage your work load at a council office without being there for 12 hours a day, you're obviously not cut out for work in any shape or form.

[quote][p][bold]Keptquiettillnow[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]johanuk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote:
1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.[/p][/quote]Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!![/p][/quote]It doesn't sound that many when you think of the population in Southend. Not to me anyway.
I seem to recall the hospital has close to 4000 employees for comparison.[/p][/quote]How many visitors / patients do they administer to on a daily basis at the hospital compared to the 'droves' descending upon the council offices? Much much higher I'd imagine.
At the hospital they are dealing with bodies and lives. At the council offices they are shuffling pieces of paper and trying see who can score the highest on Tetris or updating Facebook all day. (Provided they can cram that in between their tea, coffee and lunch breaks.)
If you cannot manage your work load at a council office without being there for 12 hours a day, you're obviously not cut out for work in any shape or form.RochfordRob

Nebs wrote:
1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.

Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!!

It doesn't sound that many when you think of the population in Southend. Not to me anyway.
I seem to recall the hospital has close to 4000 employees for comparison.

How many visitors / patients do they administer to on a daily basis at the hospital compared to the 'droves' descending upon the council offices? Much much higher I'd imagine.

At the hospital they are dealing with bodies and lives. At the council offices they are shuffling pieces of paper and trying see who can score the highest on Tetris or updating Facebook all day. (Provided they can cram that in between their tea, coffee and lunch breaks.)

If you cannot manage your work load at a council office without being there for 12 hours a day, you're obviously not cut out for work in any shape or form.

If you collapse from stress at work then you need to need to be moved to a job that is more suited to your talents. If that means a downgrade then so be it. If you can't do the job then talk to your boss, although whoever is your boss should be aware of your capabilities and if they are not then maybe they should consider a downward career move too.

[quote][p][bold]RochfordRob[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Keptquiettillnow[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]johanuk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote:
1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.[/p][/quote]Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!![/p][/quote]It doesn't sound that many when you think of the population in Southend. Not to me anyway.
I seem to recall the hospital has close to 4000 employees for comparison.[/p][/quote]How many visitors / patients do they administer to on a daily basis at the hospital compared to the 'droves' descending upon the council offices? Much much higher I'd imagine.
At the hospital they are dealing with bodies and lives. At the council offices they are shuffling pieces of paper and trying see who can score the highest on Tetris or updating Facebook all day. (Provided they can cram that in between their tea, coffee and lunch breaks.)
If you cannot manage your work load at a council office without being there for 12 hours a day, you're obviously not cut out for work in any shape or form.[/p][/quote]If you collapse from stress at work then you need to need to be moved to a job that is more suited to your talents. If that means a downgrade then so be it. If you can't do the job then talk to your boss, although whoever is your boss should be aware of your capabilities and if they are not then maybe they should consider a downward career move too.Nebs

Stress is a very serious issue, and can affect people in very different, and sometimes very accute, ways. However, it is also being used far to often as an easy "get out of jail free card" excuse for other issues not related to stress at all.

Stress is a very serious issue, and can affect people in very different, and sometimes very accute, ways. However, it is also being used far to often as an easy "get out of jail free card" excuse for other issues not related to stress at all.emcee

RochfordRob wrote:
Being asked to do something probably stressed them out. After all, if so many weren't going Tom &amp; Dick, they'd be falling over each other.

I had an insight to one small Dept. at the council HQ in Southend a few years back.

They had a receptionist. Behind her was an office of almost 20 people. Every 'quota' had been matched and box ticked. They even had some poor fella sat on some sort of machine like Stephen Hawking.

Everyone sat about chatting and not doing very much. Half way through proceedings a tea lady arrived.

Full sized trolley, tea urn, selection of cakes sweets, you name it. Like something from the early seventies The non activity ground to a complete halt for another 20 minutes at this point.

I was astonished. Years ago I had visited an equivalent Dept. elsewhere in the country, in a town similar in size - their headcount for the same function was one person.

Visited? You meant working at dont you?

After all they are civil servants as are you!

[quote][p][bold]RochfordRob[/bold] wrote:
Being asked to do something probably stressed them out. After all, if so many weren't going Tom & Dick, they'd be falling over each other.
I had an insight to one small Dept. at the council HQ in Southend a few years back.
They had a receptionist. Behind her was an office of almost 20 people. Every 'quota' had been matched and box ticked. They even had some poor fella sat on some sort of machine like Stephen Hawking.
Everyone sat about chatting and not doing very much. Half way through proceedings a tea lady arrived.
Full sized trolley, tea urn, selection of cakes sweets, you name it. Like something from the early seventies The non activity ground to a complete halt for another 20 minutes at this point.
I was astonished. Years ago I had visited an equivalent Dept. elsewhere in the country, in a town similar in size - their headcount for the same function was one person.[/p][/quote]Visited? You meant working at dont you?
After all they are civil servants as are you!LauqhLast..

emcee wrote:
Stress is a very serious issue, and can affect people in very different, and sometimes very accute, ways. However, it is also being used far to often as an easy &quot;get out of jail free card" excuse for other issues not related to stress at all.

Thats why the building is so tall, they can always use the quick way down

[quote][p][bold]emcee[/bold] wrote:
Stress is a very serious issue, and can affect people in very different, and sometimes very accute, ways. However, it is also being used far to often as an easy "get out of jail free card" excuse for other issues not related to stress at all.[/p][/quote]Thats why the building is so tall, they can always use the quick way downNowthatsworthknowing

RochfordRob wrote:
Being asked to do something probably stressed them out. After all, if so many weren't going Tom &amp; Dick, they'd be falling over each other.

I had an insight to one small Dept. at the council HQ in Southend a few years back.

They had a receptionist. Behind her was an office of almost 20 people. Every 'quota' had been matched and box ticked. They even had some poor fella sat on some sort of machine like Stephen Hawking.

Everyone sat about chatting and not doing very much. Half way through proceedings a tea lady arrived.

Full sized trolley, tea urn, selection of cakes sweets, you name it. Like something from the early seventies The non activity ground to a complete halt for another 20 minutes at this point.

I was astonished. Years ago I had visited an equivalent Dept. elsewhere in the country, in a town similar in size - their headcount for the same function was one person.

Visited? You meant working at dont you?

After all they are civil servants as are you!

No, I know what I wrote and I know what I meant, so again, you are wrong and wrong.

So, nothing new there then.

And nothing relevant to say about the subject matter, but there again you wouldn't would you?

Why would you go to the council - to pay your tax? Apply for a house? Planning permission?

yeah, right.

I think benefits are administered somewhere else.

[quote][p][bold]LauqhLast..[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]RochfordRob[/bold] wrote:
Being asked to do something probably stressed them out. After all, if so many weren't going Tom & Dick, they'd be falling over each other.
I had an insight to one small Dept. at the council HQ in Southend a few years back.
They had a receptionist. Behind her was an office of almost 20 people. Every 'quota' had been matched and box ticked. They even had some poor fella sat on some sort of machine like Stephen Hawking.
Everyone sat about chatting and not doing very much. Half way through proceedings a tea lady arrived.
Full sized trolley, tea urn, selection of cakes sweets, you name it. Like something from the early seventies The non activity ground to a complete halt for another 20 minutes at this point.
I was astonished. Years ago I had visited an equivalent Dept. elsewhere in the country, in a town similar in size - their headcount for the same function was one person.[/p][/quote]Visited? You meant working at dont you?
After all they are civil servants as are you![/p][/quote]No, I know what I wrote and I know what I meant, so again, you are wrong and wrong.
So, nothing new there then.
And nothing relevant to say about the subject matter, but there again you wouldn't would you?
Why would you go to the council - to pay your tax? Apply for a house? Planning permission?
yeah, right.
I think benefits are administered somewhere else.RochfordRob

RochfordRob wrote:
Being asked to do something probably stressed them out. After all, if so many weren't going Tom &amp; Dick, they'd be falling over each other.

I had an insight to one small Dept. at the council HQ in Southend a few years back.

They had a receptionist. Behind her was an office of almost 20 people. Every 'quota' had been matched and box ticked. They even had some poor fella sat on some sort of machine like Stephen Hawking.

Everyone sat about chatting and not doing very much. Half way through proceedings a tea lady arrived.

Full sized trolley, tea urn, selection of cakes sweets, you name it. Like something from the early seventies The non activity ground to a complete halt for another 20 minutes at this point.

I was astonished. Years ago I had visited an equivalent Dept. elsewhere in the country, in a town similar in size - their headcount for the same function was one person.

Visited? You meant working at dont you?

After all they are civil servants as are you!

No, I know what I wrote and I know what I meant, so again, you are wrong and wrong.

So, nothing new there then.

And nothing relevant to say about the subject matter, but there again you wouldn't would you?

Why would you go to the council - to pay your tax? Apply for a house? Planning permission?

yeah, right.

I think benefits are administered somewhere else.

I suppose your constant posting off topic doesn't count because its you doing it?

The same old same old *nothing new there then* can you not think of anything else to say? Be a bit more original.

My tax is paid by an accountant...and all else by direct debit...so no need to engage personally with such an entity as a council...so civil servant of sorts or something along those lines?...I wonder what they in the office will think of past posts?

[quote][p][bold]RochfordRob[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]LauqhLast..[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]RochfordRob[/bold] wrote:
Being asked to do something probably stressed them out. After all, if so many weren't going Tom & Dick, they'd be falling over each other.
I had an insight to one small Dept. at the council HQ in Southend a few years back.
They had a receptionist. Behind her was an office of almost 20 people. Every 'quota' had been matched and box ticked. They even had some poor fella sat on some sort of machine like Stephen Hawking.
Everyone sat about chatting and not doing very much. Half way through proceedings a tea lady arrived.
Full sized trolley, tea urn, selection of cakes sweets, you name it. Like something from the early seventies The non activity ground to a complete halt for another 20 minutes at this point.
I was astonished. Years ago I had visited an equivalent Dept. elsewhere in the country, in a town similar in size - their headcount for the same function was one person.[/p][/quote]Visited? You meant working at dont you?
After all they are civil servants as are you![/p][/quote]No, I know what I wrote and I know what I meant, so again, you are wrong and wrong.
So, nothing new there then.
And nothing relevant to say about the subject matter, but there again you wouldn't would you?
Why would you go to the council - to pay your tax? Apply for a house? Planning permission?
yeah, right.
I think benefits are administered somewhere else.[/p][/quote]I suppose your constant posting off topic doesn't count because its you doing it?
The same old same old *nothing new there then* can you not think of anything else to say? Be a bit more original.
My tax is paid by an accountant...and all else by direct debit...so no need to engage personally with such an entity as a council...so civil servant of sorts or something along those lines?...I wonder what they in the office will think of past posts?LauqhLast..

The public sector employment gravy-train needs a good shake-up. As another example, the fire service who've been on easy street for years -
overly generous shift patterns that means fire-fighting is pretty much a part-time job.

Time for change.

It's a case of typical public sector low productivity; over-inflated staff numbers sitting behind a desk doing the minimum possible.
The public sector employment gravy-train needs a good shake-up. As another example, the fire service who've been on easy street for years -
overly generous shift patterns that means fire-fighting is pretty much a part-time job.
Time for change.Loosers

Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....

Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....EssexBoy1968

The public sector employment gravy-train needs a good shake-up. As another example, the fire service who've been on easy street for years -
overly generous shift patterns that means fire-fighting is pretty much a part-time job.

Time for change.

Time for change?

where have i heard this before... Hmmm. I think 'change' or more in the constant political supply of uncoordinated, obsoletely ideological 'change' is the route cause of most of our problems.

As for the public sector. It currently consists of a demoralised and emaciated public servant who is manning a disconnected telephone in a shed on a wind swept hill in an unremarkable part of Cardiff.

give up son.. This is Tory town!

[quote][p][bold]Loosers[/bold] wrote:
It's a case of typical public sector low productivity; over-inflated staff numbers sitting behind a desk doing the minimum possible.
The public sector employment gravy-train needs a good shake-up. As another example, the fire service who've been on easy street for years -
overly generous shift patterns that means fire-fighting is pretty much a part-time job.
Time for change.[/p][/quote]Time for change?
where have i heard this before... Hmmm. I think 'change' or more in the constant political supply of uncoordinated, obsoletely ideological 'change' is the route cause of most of our problems.
As for the public sector. It currently consists of a demoralised and emaciated public servant who is manning a disconnected telephone in a shed on a wind swept hill in an unremarkable part of Cardiff.
give up son.. This is Tory town!jayman

They would not know REAL stress if it appeared and bit them in the backside. Council and Government employees have absolutely no conception of hard work. How is it that in times of hardship, Councils and Government shed "workers" at will and things still continue. This beggars the question why were these people employed, at OUR expense in the first place? The "price" these mostly lazy, spoilt employees pay for their underworked, overpaid and benefits strewn positions is that their mercenary employees shall shaft them at the first opportunity. Sympathy for any of these people? Never in a million years...

They would not know REAL stress if it appeared and bit them in the backside. Council and Government employees have absolutely no conception of hard work. How is it that in times of hardship, Councils and Government shed "workers" at will and things still continue. This beggars the question why were these people employed, at OUR expense in the first place? The "price" these mostly lazy, spoilt employees pay for their underworked, overpaid and benefits strewn positions is that their mercenary employees shall shaft them at the first opportunity. Sympathy for any of these people? Never in a million years...colsmith

The public sector employment gravy-train needs a good shake-up. As another example, the fire service who've been on easy street for years -
overly generous shift patterns that means fire-fighting is pretty much a part-time job.

Time for change.

'time for change' ? well maybe, but whether in a pointless job or on the 'king cole' you still end up paying for them...

[quote][p][bold]Loosers[/bold] wrote:
It's a case of typical public sector low productivity; over-inflated staff numbers sitting behind a desk doing the minimum possible.
The public sector employment gravy-train needs a good shake-up. As another example, the fire service who've been on easy street for years -
overly generous shift patterns that means fire-fighting is pretty much a part-time job.
Time for change.[/p][/quote]'time for change' ? well maybe, but whether in a pointless job or on the 'king cole' you still end up paying for them...pembury53

As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a "reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.

As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a "reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.tezzason1

tezzason1 wrote:
As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a &quot;reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.

They don't read any of the rubbish we type. If you want them to consider your suggestion then email them, but don't hold your breath.

[quote][p][bold]tezzason1[/bold] wrote:
As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a "reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.[/p][/quote]They don't read any of the rubbish we type. If you want them to consider your suggestion then email them, but don't hold your breath.Nebs

Benefit-Scrounger wrote:
I wouldn't know what a job is like now adays. Haven't worked for 14 years. Quite happy getting my cheque every fortnight off the social.

they don't pay in 'cheque' any more and its not called 'the social' any more also... Its a BACS payment and its the DWP. keep trying!

[quote][p][bold]Benefit-Scrounger[/bold] wrote:
I wouldn't know what a job is like now adays. Haven't worked for 14 years. Quite happy getting my cheque every fortnight off the social.[/p][/quote]they don't pay in 'cheque' any more and its not called 'the social' any more also... Its a BACS payment and its the DWP. keep trying!jayman

tezzason1 wrote:
As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a &quot;reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.

They don't read any of the rubbish we type. If you want them to consider your suggestion then email them, but don't hold your breath.

Only time they read anything is when LastLaugh / NewYear or whatever his latest incarnation is explodes into apoplectic fits and presses the 'Report this post' button. You'll normally get a little pop up missive unless he's overdone his meds in which case you might get a ban - but don't worry, do as he does, re-invent yourself and carry on.

[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]tezzason1[/bold] wrote:
As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a "reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.[/p][/quote]They don't read any of the rubbish we type. If you want them to consider your suggestion then email them, but don't hold your breath.[/p][/quote]Only time they read anything is when LastLaugh / NewYear or whatever his latest incarnation is explodes into apoplectic fits and presses the 'Report this post' button. You'll normally get a little pop up missive unless he's overdone his meds in which case you might get a ban - but don't worry, do as he does, re-invent yourself and carry on.RochfordRob

tezzason1 wrote:
As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a &quot;reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.

They don't read any of the rubbish we type. If you want them to consider your suggestion then email them, but don't hold your breath.

Only time they read anything is when LastLaugh / NewYear or whatever his latest incarnation is explodes into apoplectic fits and presses the 'Report this post' button. You'll normally get a little pop up missive unless he's overdone his meds in which case you might get a ban - but don't worry, do as he does, re-invent yourself and carry on.

You hypocritical talk of 'incarnation' while recently back under another one yourself..

You were banned for constant swearing, because you could get your point across any other way, and of course for using foul innuendo on a thread about a young girl!

Not many get banned for either of those never mind both.

I reported a user who was using the EXACT same user name as mine...isn't that a legitimate reason for reporting and a cause for alarm?

Imagine a user name the EXACT copy of yours and then imagine the mischief if not the legal problems that might cause..should such a inadequate individual looking to be in control of such a scenario not be reported?

It is often the case those who make mention of 'meds' are themselves on 'meds' by the causal acceptance that anyone who disagrees with them must be medicated..like them?

The tactic of claiming someone is on 'meds' or swearing is well known as the last attempt to get a point across because of inadequacy to do so any other way.. :(

[quote][p][bold]RochfordRob[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]tezzason1[/bold] wrote:
As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a "reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.[/p][/quote]They don't read any of the rubbish we type. If you want them to consider your suggestion then email them, but don't hold your breath.[/p][/quote]Only time they read anything is when LastLaugh / NewYear or whatever his latest incarnation is explodes into apoplectic fits and presses the 'Report this post' button. You'll normally get a little pop up missive unless he's overdone his meds in which case you might get a ban - but don't worry, do as he does, re-invent yourself and carry on.[/p][/quote]You hypocritical talk of 'incarnation' while recently back under another one yourself..
You were banned for constant swearing, because you could get your point across any other way, and of course for using foul innuendo on a thread about a young girl!
Not many get banned for either of those never mind both.
I reported a user who was using the EXACT same user name as mine...isn't that a legitimate reason for reporting and a cause for alarm?
Imagine a user name the EXACT copy of yours and then imagine the mischief if not the legal problems that might cause..should such a inadequate individual looking to be in control of such a scenario not be reported?
It is often the case those who make mention of 'meds' are themselves on 'meds' by the causal acceptance that anyone who disagrees with them must be medicated..like them?
The tactic of claiming someone is on 'meds' or swearing is well known as the last attempt to get a point across because of inadequacy to do so any other way.. :(ThisYear

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!saveDeanesschool

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

You must be mad. I get everything paid for basically. Im not getting a job stacking shelves in a supermarket for minimum wage because then I'll have to pay for everything and be worse off then probably. Get in the real world and just quit your job. Stress free!

[quote][p][bold]saveDeanesschool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'![/p][/quote]You must be mad. I get everything paid for basically. Im not getting a job stacking shelves in a supermarket for minimum wage because then I'll have to pay for everything and be worse off then probably. Get in the real world and just quit your job. Stress free!Benefit-Scrounger

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job!

[quote][p][bold]saveDeanesschool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'![/p][/quote]I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job!Benefit-Scrounger

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job!

[quote][p][bold]saveDeanesschool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'![/p][/quote]I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job!Benefit-Scrounger

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job!

your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.

[quote][p][bold]Benefit-Scrounger[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]saveDeanesschool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'![/p][/quote]I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job![/p][/quote]your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.jayman

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job!

your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.

which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically).

[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Benefit-Scrounger[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]saveDeanesschool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'![/p][/quote]I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job![/p][/quote]your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.[/p][/quote]which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically).profondo asbo

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job!

your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.

which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically).

Does that include pensioners and working people?

[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Benefit-Scrounger[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]saveDeanesschool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'![/p][/quote]I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job![/p][/quote]your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.[/p][/quote]which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically).[/p][/quote]Does that include pensioners and working people?ThisYear

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job!

your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.

which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically).

Does that include pensioners and working people?

pensioners are not benefit claimants. the state pension is accrued over your working life. personal pensions are accrued through private contributions

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Benefit-Scrounger[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]saveDeanesschool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'![/p][/quote]I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job![/p][/quote]your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.[/p][/quote]which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically).[/p][/quote]Does that include pensioners and working people?[/p][/quote]pensioners are not benefit claimants. the state pension is accrued over your working life. personal pensions are accrued through private contributionsprofondo asbo

Nebs wrote:
1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.

Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!!

Totally agree. The entire Roman Empire, stretching from Scotland to the Middle East, was run with fewer than 1600 administrators. Says it all really.

[quote][p][bold]johanuk[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote:
1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.[/p][/quote]Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!![/p][/quote]Totally agree. The entire Roman Empire, stretching from Scotland to the Middle East, was run with fewer than 1600 administrators. Says it all really.bazza 1

tezzason1 wrote:
As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a &quot;reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.

They don't read any of the rubbish we type. If you want them to consider your suggestion then email them, but don't hold your breath.

Only time they read anything is when LastLaugh / NewYear or whatever his latest incarnation is explodes into apoplectic fits and presses the 'Report this post' button. You'll normally get a little pop up missive unless he's overdone his meds in which case you might get a ban - but don't worry, do as he does, re-invent yourself and carry on.

Thats quite hurtful, do you have a relation called Gandy, as the two of you seem to spout the same vile pus, which will ensure your shown to be the racist vermin likened to the contents of a colostomy bag.

[quote][p][bold]RochfordRob[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]tezzason1[/bold] wrote:
As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a "reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.[/p][/quote]They don't read any of the rubbish we type. If you want them to consider your suggestion then email them, but don't hold your breath.[/p][/quote]Only time they read anything is when LastLaugh / NewYear or whatever his latest incarnation is explodes into apoplectic fits and presses the 'Report this post' button. You'll normally get a little pop up missive unless he's overdone his meds in which case you might get a ban - but don't worry, do as he does, re-invent yourself and carry on.[/p][/quote]Thats quite hurtful, do you have a relation called Gandy, as the two of you seem to spout the same vile pus, which will ensure your shown to be the racist vermin likened to the contents of a colostomy bag.Laughlust

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

High time you got off your backside, fancy leaving your other half to do all the work.

[quote][p][bold]saveDeanesschool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'![/p][/quote]High time you got off your backside, fancy leaving your other half to do all the work.Laughlust

You'dfeelbetterforkn
owingthat wrote:
Looking at the picture, reminds me of the Maybrook adult training centre, if this lot have anything to do with the council, is it any wonder Southend is in the sh1t

All thats missing is that Eva Braun from Rayleigh.....

[quote][p][bold]You'dfeelbetterforkn
owingthat[/bold] wrote:
Looking at the picture, reminds me of the Maybrook adult training centre, if this lot have anything to do with the council, is it any wonder Southend is in the sh1t[/p][/quote]All thats missing is that Eva Braun from Rayleigh.....Laughlust

Nebs wrote: 1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.

Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!!

Totally agree. The entire Roman Empire, stretching from Scotland to the Middle East, was run with fewer than 1600 administrators. Says it all really.

Lots of road building projects to guarantee full employment and anybody unwilling to work could be sent to gladiator school. Woman woads also paid for themselves many time over by toll collected by people who we are not allowed to mention on this site.

[quote][p][bold]bazza 1[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]johanuk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: 1,600 staff in the Civic Centre. What is there to do all day for that many people.[/p][/quote]Yes i have to agree!........1600 staff does seem a lot to me!![/p][/quote]Totally agree. The entire Roman Empire, stretching from Scotland to the Middle East, was run with fewer than 1600 administrators. Says it all really.[/p][/quote]Lots of road building projects to guarantee full employment and anybody unwilling to work could be sent to gladiator school. Woman woads also paid for themselves many time over by toll collected by people who we are not allowed to mention on this site.Alekhine

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job!

your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.

which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically).

Your statement is neither accurate or ironic.

[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Benefit-Scrounger[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]saveDeanesschool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'![/p][/quote]I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job![/p][/quote]your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.[/p][/quote]which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically).[/p][/quote]Your statement is neither accurate or ironic.jayman

Letmetryagain wrote:
It reminds me of the time when a young lady at Rochford council had a six months off (fully paid) suffering from stress, when her married lover decided to stay with his wife.

brother can you spare a hanky?

[quote][p][bold]Letmetryagain[/bold] wrote:
It reminds me of the time when a young lady at Rochford council had a six months off (fully paid) suffering from stress, when her married lover decided to stay with his wife.[/p][/quote]brother can you spare a hanky?profondo asbo

EssexBoy1968 wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues &amp; the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health &amp; retirement pensions....

My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'!

I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job!

your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.

which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically).

Does that include pensioners and working people?

pensioners are not benefit claimants. the state pension is accrued over your working life. personal pensions are accrued through private contributions

Pensioners receive benefits which they apply for by filling in forms..making them benefit claimants...they receive Housing benefit, which they must claim and council tax benefits which they must claim.. so the question remains..

"your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story."
"which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically)."

"Does that include pensioners and working people?"

[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Benefit-Scrounger[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]saveDeanesschool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]EssexBoy1968[/bold] wrote:
Sounds like they should be grateful they are working in the public sector - if they were in the private sector, not only would they be stressed over work issues & the possiblity of (reasonably generous) redundancy, but they would be making themselves worse worrying about not being paid when off sick.
Yes, I am sure it is stressful not knowing whether you will keep your job or not, but no different from the rest of us. At least the public sector have decent packages for redundancy, ill health & retirement pensions....[/p][/quote]My other half does a 12 hour day everyday, doesn't recieve sick pay and gets 4 weeks holiday a year. We haven't, or our children, had a holiday in 7 years, before that it was in this country. ..get over it and get in the real working world to experience 'stress'![/p][/quote]I get everything paid for basically. I'm not going to get a job for minimum wage stacking shelves or whatever and losing all my handouts. I'll be worse of then probably. Get in the real world and quit your job![/p][/quote]your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story.[/p][/quote]which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically).[/p][/quote]Does that include pensioners and working people?[/p][/quote]pensioners are not benefit claimants. the state pension is accrued over your working life. personal pensions are accrued through private contributions[/p][/quote]Pensioners receive benefits which they apply for by filling in forms..making them benefit claimants...they receive Housing benefit, which they must claim and council tax benefits which they must claim.. so the question remains..
"your about as credible as a four year old's 'broken window' cover story."
"which is about as credible as the average benefit claimant (ironically)."
"Does that include pensioners and working people?"ThisYear

profondo asbo wrote:
a pension is only viewed as a benefit by someone who has never worked.

A truly ridiculous statement..can we take it that you are a benefit claimant by way of a state pension....but besides that what of housing benefits and council tax benefits..are they not claimed by pensioners..seems you may of been mislead by the 'benefit scrounger' slur being aimed at the 3% of unemployment benefit paid to jobseekers...

[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
a pension is only viewed as a benefit by someone who has never worked.[/p][/quote]A truly ridiculous statement..can we take it that you are a benefit claimant by way of a state pension....but besides that what of housing benefits and council tax benefits..are they not claimed by pensioners..seems you may of been mislead by the 'benefit scrounger' slur being aimed at the 3% of unemployment benefit paid to jobseekers...ThisYear

tezzason1 wrote:
As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a &quot;reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.

They don't read any of the rubbish we type. If you want them to consider your suggestion then email them, but don't hold your breath.

They DO read the rubbish we type - a week or so ago I saw a comment I made here about the cancellation of flights to Edinburgh printed in the Echo, complete with my user name. A friend sent it to me, and I thought, Yes, I am that Auld Git ....

[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]tezzason1[/bold] wrote:
As a new subscriber to this site, I would suggest the Southend Standard needs to streamline the current format which is cumbersome. It is not necessary to clutter up the blogs by re-republishing the original comment every time a response to that specific blog is made. Simply print the comment with a box that can be ticked as a "reply" .You will end up with the original comment with replies for or against underneath and indented a couple of centimetres so that they clearly show they are attached to the primary comment, Ticking the 'reply' box is optional. A number of sites do this on the internet. Take a look at the 'Times of India' to see how it is done.[/p][/quote]They don't read any of the rubbish we type. If you want them to consider your suggestion then email them, but don't hold your breath.[/p][/quote]They DO read the rubbish we type - a week or so ago I saw a comment I made here about the cancellation of flights to Edinburgh printed in the Echo, complete with my user name. A friend sent it to me, and I thought, Yes, I am that Auld Git ....AuldGit

profondo asbo wrote:
pensions are an entitlement. benefits are means tested. what is difficult to understand?

Benefits are entitlements too...if people wasn't entitled to them they wouldn't get them...but again putting that aside...what of the housing benefit and council tax benefit..does that make a pensioner a benefit claimant?

If so does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story?

[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
pensions are an entitlement. benefits are means tested. what is difficult to understand?[/p][/quote]Benefits are entitlements too...if people wasn't entitled to them they wouldn't get them...but again putting that aside...what of the housing benefit and council tax benefit..does that make a pensioner a benefit claimant?
If so does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story?ThisYear

profondo asbo wrote:
pensions are an entitlement. benefits are means tested. what is difficult to understand?

Benefits are entitlements too...if people wasn't entitled to them they wouldn't get them...but again putting that aside...what of the housing benefit and council tax benefit..does that make a pensioner a benefit claimant?

If so does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story?

yes i'm sure they are in your head. that is the kind of mistaken philosophy that has brought the country to the brink of bankruptcy and beyond

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
pensions are an entitlement. benefits are means tested. what is difficult to understand?[/p][/quote]Benefits are entitlements too...if people wasn't entitled to them they wouldn't get them...but again putting that aside...what of the housing benefit and council tax benefit..does that make a pensioner a benefit claimant?
If so does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story?[/p][/quote]yes i'm sure they are in your head. that is the kind of mistaken philosophy that has brought the country to the brink of bankruptcy and beyondprofondo asbo

profondo asbo wrote:
pensions are an entitlement. benefits are means tested. what is difficult to understand?

Benefits are entitlements too...if people wasn't entitled to them they wouldn't get them...but again putting that aside...what of the housing benefit and council tax benefit..does that make a pensioner a benefit claimant?

If so does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story?

yes i'm sure they are in your head. that is the kind of mistaken philosophy that has brought the country to the brink of bankruptcy and beyond

Im sorry but are you saying housing BENEFIT and council tax BENEFIT are not benefits?

With all due respect; is your reluctance to accept this is the case because you might just be considered a benefit claimant?

[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
pensions are an entitlement. benefits are means tested. what is difficult to understand?[/p][/quote]Benefits are entitlements too...if people wasn't entitled to them they wouldn't get them...but again putting that aside...what of the housing benefit and council tax benefit..does that make a pensioner a benefit claimant?
If so does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story?[/p][/quote]yes i'm sure they are in your head. that is the kind of mistaken philosophy that has brought the country to the brink of bankruptcy and beyond[/p][/quote]Im sorry but are you saying housing BENEFIT and council tax BENEFIT are not benefits?
With all due respect; is your reluctance to accept this is the case because you might just be considered a benefit claimant?ThisYear

profondo asbo wrote:
pensions are an entitlement. benefits are means tested. what is difficult to understand?

Benefits are entitlements too...if people wasn't entitled to them they wouldn't get them...but again putting that aside...what of the housing benefit and council tax benefit..does that make a pensioner a benefit claimant?

If so does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story?

yes i'm sure they are in your head. that is the kind of mistaken philosophy that has brought the country to the brink of bankruptcy and beyond

Im sorry but are you saying housing BENEFIT and council tax BENEFIT are not benefits?

With all due respect; is your reluctance to accept this is the case because you might just be considered a benefit claimant?

oh dear i give up. they are means tested so they are benefits...? i am in receipt of neither nor am i a pensioner.

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
pensions are an entitlement. benefits are means tested. what is difficult to understand?[/p][/quote]Benefits are entitlements too...if people wasn't entitled to them they wouldn't get them...but again putting that aside...what of the housing benefit and council tax benefit..does that make a pensioner a benefit claimant?
If so does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story?[/p][/quote]yes i'm sure they are in your head. that is the kind of mistaken philosophy that has brought the country to the brink of bankruptcy and beyond[/p][/quote]Im sorry but are you saying housing BENEFIT and council tax BENEFIT are not benefits?
With all due respect; is your reluctance to accept this is the case because you might just be considered a benefit claimant?[/p][/quote]oh dear i give up. they are means tested so they are benefits...? i am in receipt of neither nor am i a pensioner.profondo asbo

profondo asbo wrote:
pensions are an entitlement. benefits are means tested. what is difficult to understand?

Benefits are entitlements too...if people wasn't entitled to them they wouldn't get them...but again putting that aside...what of the housing benefit and council tax benefit..does that make a pensioner a benefit claimant?

If so does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story?

yes i'm sure they are in your head. that is the kind of mistaken philosophy that has brought the country to the brink of bankruptcy and beyond

Im sorry but are you saying housing BENEFIT and council tax BENEFIT are not benefits?

With all due respect; is your reluctance to accept this is the case because you might just be considered a benefit claimant?

oh dear i give up. they are means tested so they are benefits...? i am in receipt of neither nor am i a pensioner.

So you accept that they are benefits (at long last) so the question remains..

Re: pensioners claiming benefits...does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story

[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote:
pensions are an entitlement. benefits are means tested. what is difficult to understand?[/p][/quote]Benefits are entitlements too...if people wasn't entitled to them they wouldn't get them...but again putting that aside...what of the housing benefit and council tax benefit..does that make a pensioner a benefit claimant?
If so does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window story?[/p][/quote]yes i'm sure they are in your head. that is the kind of mistaken philosophy that has brought the country to the brink of bankruptcy and beyond[/p][/quote]Im sorry but are you saying housing BENEFIT and council tax BENEFIT are not benefits?
With all due respect; is your reluctance to accept this is the case because you might just be considered a benefit claimant?[/p][/quote]oh dear i give up. they are means tested so they are benefits...? i am in receipt of neither nor am i a pensioner.[/p][/quote]So you accept that they are benefits (at long last) so the question remains..
Re: pensioners claiming benefits...does that make them as creditable as a 4year olds broken window storyThisYear

Not that this post will make any difference to the debate (?) but a large percentage of the employees at the Civic Centre are social workers who work with child protection, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and older people. It can be hard to leave people's problems at work and carry on with your own home life. If more people took responsibility for themselves and their families, without needing / wanting support from council tax payers, less social workers would still be in the office, late at night, trying to put support in place. Every time our wonderful Tory council decide that jobs are obsolete, there will be another social worker put under moral pressure to do what has to be done to ensure the client's safety. You will remember that this Tory council is closing Priory House which is a residential care home for older people, many of whom are physically frail and suffer with dementia. The service is considered too expensive in comparison with the private sector. Who will be assessing clients' needs and working with distressed families to find alternative residential placements? It will be the reduced number of social workers who are already under pressure.
And, if you're interested, a severely under pressure social worker recently committed suicide.
Still, don't let that get in the way of your cheap jibes.
And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.

Not that this post will make any difference to the debate (?) but a large percentage of the employees at the Civic Centre are social workers who work with child protection, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and older people. It can be hard to leave people's problems at work and carry on with your own home life. If more people took responsibility for themselves and their families, without needing / wanting support from council tax payers, less social workers would still be in the office, late at night, trying to put support in place. Every time our wonderful Tory council decide that jobs are obsolete, there will be another social worker put under moral pressure to do what has to be done to ensure the client's safety. You will remember that this Tory council is closing Priory House which is a residential care home for older people, many of whom are physically frail and suffer with dementia. The service is considered too expensive in comparison with the private sector. Who will be assessing clients' needs and working with distressed families to find alternative residential placements? It will be the reduced number of social workers who are already under pressure.
And, if you're interested, a severely under pressure social worker recently committed suicide.
Still, don't let that get in the way of your cheap jibes.
And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.Virtuallintu

You'dfeelbetterforkn
owingthat wrote:
Looking at the picture, reminds me of the Maybrook adult training centre, if this lot have anything to do with the council, is it any wonder Southend is in the sh1t

What a wonderful contribution.
I'm sure the people in the photo, their friends and family are deeply hurt by your personal attack. I wonder what has happened in your own life to make you feel that you can hurt other people without compunction.
I'm sorry to see you do this to yourself.

[quote][p][bold]You'dfeelbetterforkn
owingthat[/bold] wrote:
Looking at the picture, reminds me of the Maybrook adult training centre, if this lot have anything to do with the council, is it any wonder Southend is in the sh1t[/p][/quote]What a wonderful contribution.
I'm sure the people in the photo, their friends and family are deeply hurt by your personal attack. I wonder what has happened in your own life to make you feel that you can hurt other people without compunction.
I'm sorry to see you do this to yourself.Virtuallintu

Virtuallintu wrote:
Not that this post will make any difference to the debate (?) but a large percentage of the employees at the Civic Centre are social workers who work with child protection, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and older people. It can be hard to leave people's problems at work and carry on with your own home life. If more people took responsibility for themselves and their families, without needing / wanting support from council tax payers, less social workers would still be in the office, late at night, trying to put support in place. Every time our wonderful Tory council decide that jobs are obsolete, there will be another social worker put under moral pressure to do what has to be done to ensure the client's safety. You will remember that this Tory council is closing Priory House which is a residential care home for older people, many of whom are physically frail and suffer with dementia. The service is considered too expensive in comparison with the private sector. Who will be assessing clients' needs and working with distressed families to find alternative residential placements? It will be the reduced number of social workers who are already under pressure.
And, if you're interested, a severely under pressure social worker recently committed suicide.
Still, don't let that get in the way of your cheap jibes.
And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.

Who do you think RochfordRob is?

[quote][p][bold]Virtuallintu[/bold] wrote:
Not that this post will make any difference to the debate (?) but a large percentage of the employees at the Civic Centre are social workers who work with child protection, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and older people. It can be hard to leave people's problems at work and carry on with your own home life. If more people took responsibility for themselves and their families, without needing / wanting support from council tax payers, less social workers would still be in the office, late at night, trying to put support in place. Every time our wonderful Tory council decide that jobs are obsolete, there will be another social worker put under moral pressure to do what has to be done to ensure the client's safety. You will remember that this Tory council is closing Priory House which is a residential care home for older people, many of whom are physically frail and suffer with dementia. The service is considered too expensive in comparison with the private sector. Who will be assessing clients' needs and working with distressed families to find alternative residential placements? It will be the reduced number of social workers who are already under pressure.
And, if you're interested, a severely under pressure social worker recently committed suicide.
Still, don't let that get in the way of your cheap jibes.
And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.[/p][/quote]Who do you think RochfordRob is?ThisYear

Virtuallintu wrote: Not that this post will make any difference to the debate (?) but a large percentage of the employees at the Civic Centre are social workers who work with child protection, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and older people. It can be hard to leave people's problems at work and carry on with your own home life. If more people took responsibility for themselves and their families, without needing / wanting support from council tax payers, less social workers would still be in the office, late at night, trying to put support in place. Every time our wonderful Tory council decide that jobs are obsolete, there will be another social worker put under moral pressure to do what has to be done to ensure the client's safety. You will remember that this Tory council is closing Priory House which is a residential care home for older people, many of whom are physically frail and suffer with dementia. The service is considered too expensive in comparison with the private sector. Who will be assessing clients' needs and working with distressed families to find alternative residential placements? It will be the reduced number of social workers who are already under pressure. And, if you're interested, a severely under pressure social worker recently committed suicide. Still, don't let that get in the way of your cheap jibes. And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.

Who do you think RochfordRob is?

Wouldn't you just love to know?

Oooh, I have a stalker.

Am not flattered given it's you.

Trying to obtain that information contravenes data protection.

I'd be careful if I were you - that's tantamount to 'phishing'

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Virtuallintu[/bold] wrote: Not that this post will make any difference to the debate (?) but a large percentage of the employees at the Civic Centre are social workers who work with child protection, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and older people. It can be hard to leave people's problems at work and carry on with your own home life. If more people took responsibility for themselves and their families, without needing / wanting support from council tax payers, less social workers would still be in the office, late at night, trying to put support in place. Every time our wonderful Tory council decide that jobs are obsolete, there will be another social worker put under moral pressure to do what has to be done to ensure the client's safety. You will remember that this Tory council is closing Priory House which is a residential care home for older people, many of whom are physically frail and suffer with dementia. The service is considered too expensive in comparison with the private sector. Who will be assessing clients' needs and working with distressed families to find alternative residential placements? It will be the reduced number of social workers who are already under pressure. And, if you're interested, a severely under pressure social worker recently committed suicide. Still, don't let that get in the way of your cheap jibes. And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.[/p][/quote]Who do you think RochfordRob is?[/p][/quote]Wouldn't you just love to know?
Oooh, I have a stalker.
Am not flattered given it's you.
Trying to obtain that information contravenes data protection.
I'd be careful if I were you - that's tantamount to 'phishing'RochfordRob

Virtuallintu wrote: Not that this post will make any difference to the debate (?) but a large percentage of the employees at the Civic Centre are social workers who work with child protection, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and older people. It can be hard to leave people's problems at work and carry on with your own home life. If more people took responsibility for themselves and their families, without needing / wanting support from council tax payers, less social workers would still be in the office, late at night, trying to put support in place. Every time our wonderful Tory council decide that jobs are obsolete, there will be another social worker put under moral pressure to do what has to be done to ensure the client's safety. You will remember that this Tory council is closing Priory House which is a residential care home for older people, many of whom are physically frail and suffer with dementia. The service is considered too expensive in comparison with the private sector. Who will be assessing clients' needs and working with distressed families to find alternative residential placements? It will be the reduced number of social workers who are already under pressure. And, if you're interested, a severely under pressure social worker recently committed suicide. Still, don't let that get in the way of your cheap jibes. And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.

Who do you think RochfordRob is?

Wouldn't you just love to know?

Oooh, I have a stalker.

Am not flattered given it's you.

Trying to obtain that information contravenes data protection.

I'd be careful if I were you - that's tantamount to 'phishing'

I say...I was merely calling the other chappies bluff..Im sure you have all your details and such encrypted and safe...thing is...re: the other chappie...is he right? if you are who he thinks you are should you hang you head in shame?

[quote][p][bold]RochfordRob[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Virtuallintu[/bold] wrote: Not that this post will make any difference to the debate (?) but a large percentage of the employees at the Civic Centre are social workers who work with child protection, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and older people. It can be hard to leave people's problems at work and carry on with your own home life. If more people took responsibility for themselves and their families, without needing / wanting support from council tax payers, less social workers would still be in the office, late at night, trying to put support in place. Every time our wonderful Tory council decide that jobs are obsolete, there will be another social worker put under moral pressure to do what has to be done to ensure the client's safety. You will remember that this Tory council is closing Priory House which is a residential care home for older people, many of whom are physically frail and suffer with dementia. The service is considered too expensive in comparison with the private sector. Who will be assessing clients' needs and working with distressed families to find alternative residential placements? It will be the reduced number of social workers who are already under pressure. And, if you're interested, a severely under pressure social worker recently committed suicide. Still, don't let that get in the way of your cheap jibes. And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.[/p][/quote]Who do you think RochfordRob is?[/p][/quote]Wouldn't you just love to know?
Oooh, I have a stalker.
Am not flattered given it's you.
Trying to obtain that information contravenes data protection.
I'd be careful if I were you - that's tantamount to 'phishing'[/p][/quote]I say...I was merely calling the other chappies bluff..Im sure you have all your details and such encrypted and safe...thing is...re: the other chappie...is he right? if you are who he thinks you are should you hang you head in shame?ThisYear

Virtuallintu wrote:
Not that this post will make any difference to the debate (?) but a large percentage of the employees at the Civic Centre are social workers who work with child protection, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and older people. It can be hard to leave people's problems at work and carry on with your own home life. If more people took responsibility for themselves and their families, without needing / wanting support from council tax payers, less social workers would still be in the office, late at night, trying to put support in place. Every time our wonderful Tory council decide that jobs are obsolete, there will be another social worker put under moral pressure to do what has to be done to ensure the client's safety. You will remember that this Tory council is closing Priory House which is a residential care home for older people, many of whom are physically frail and suffer with dementia. The service is considered too expensive in comparison with the private sector. Who will be assessing clients' needs and working with distressed families to find alternative residential placements? It will be the reduced number of social workers who are already under pressure.
And, if you're interested, a severely under pressure social worker recently committed suicide.
Still, don't let that get in the way of your cheap jibes.
And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.

*And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.*

RochfordRob has implied that he is an Ex-Police officer of some description...I hope that helps.

[quote][p][bold]Virtuallintu[/bold] wrote:
Not that this post will make any difference to the debate (?) but a large percentage of the employees at the Civic Centre are social workers who work with child protection, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and older people. It can be hard to leave people's problems at work and carry on with your own home life. If more people took responsibility for themselves and their families, without needing / wanting support from council tax payers, less social workers would still be in the office, late at night, trying to put support in place. Every time our wonderful Tory council decide that jobs are obsolete, there will be another social worker put under moral pressure to do what has to be done to ensure the client's safety. You will remember that this Tory council is closing Priory House which is a residential care home for older people, many of whom are physically frail and suffer with dementia. The service is considered too expensive in comparison with the private sector. Who will be assessing clients' needs and working with distressed families to find alternative residential placements? It will be the reduced number of social workers who are already under pressure.
And, if you're interested, a severely under pressure social worker recently committed suicide.
Still, don't let that get in the way of your cheap jibes.
And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.[/p][/quote]*And RochfordRob? if you are who I think you are, you should hang your head in shame.*
RochfordRob has implied that he is an Ex-Police officer of some description...I hope that helps.ThisYear

I wouldn't worry about him - having tried to co-erce the other character into doing something illegal he's now backtracking rapidly.

Hopefully, they both are.

Can't say I'm sure what Virtual-wotsit was banging on about in the first place?

Some people are soooooo bleedin touchy-feely. I'm surprised they leave the house lest they get upset seeing something 'nasty' or offended (on someone else' behalf of course)

I wouldn't worry about him - having tried to co-erce the other character into doing something illegal he's now backtracking rapidly.
Hopefully, they both are.
Can't say I'm sure what Virtual-wotsit was banging on about in the first place?
Some people are soooooo bleedin touchy-feely. I'm surprised they leave the house lest they get upset seeing something 'nasty' or offended (on someone else' behalf of course)RochfordRob

RochfordRob wrote:
I wouldn't worry about him - having tried to co-erce the other character into doing something illegal he's now backtracking rapidly.

Hopefully, they both are.

Can't say I'm sure what Virtual-wotsit was banging on about in the first place?

Some people are soooooo bleedin touchy-feely. I'm surprised they leave the house lest they get upset seeing something 'nasty' or offended (on someone else' behalf of course)

Is using someones name on a comment section Illegal?

Would be good information to know...can you advise concisely?

Would be much appreciated.

Virtual seems to be, in part, banging on about how think he knows you...

I hope he hasn't done anything illegal by thinking and posting that..would it be illegal for him to say Hi?

[quote][p][bold]RochfordRob[/bold] wrote:
I wouldn't worry about him - having tried to co-erce the other character into doing something illegal he's now backtracking rapidly.
Hopefully, they both are.
Can't say I'm sure what Virtual-wotsit was banging on about in the first place?
Some people are soooooo bleedin touchy-feely. I'm surprised they leave the house lest they get upset seeing something 'nasty' or offended (on someone else' behalf of course)[/p][/quote]Is using someones name on a comment section Illegal?
Would be good information to know...can you advise concisely?
Would be much appreciated.
Virtual seems to be, in part, banging on about how think he knows you...
I hope he hasn't done anything illegal by thinking and posting that..would it be illegal for him to say Hi?ThisYear

Not got an answer yet have you. But then why should they take a risk just to answer you.

An ex-policeman, well that narrows the field. Maybe its officer Dibble, he must have retired by now.

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Alcohine...Could he really be in trouble? How so?
And if he is right?
Would the worried chappie be in trouble?[/p][/quote]Not got an answer yet have you. But then why should they take a risk just to answer you.
An ex-policeman, well that narrows the field. Maybe its officer Dibble, he must have retired by now.Alekhine

Not got an answer yet have you. But then why should they take a risk just to answer you.

An ex-policeman, well that narrows the field. Maybe its officer Dibble, he must have retired by now.

You dont seem to be able to say how the poster in question "could be in trouble" shame and you seemed so sure as well...

You make mention of risk now...any clarification on that?

I try to help a poster and this is what I get...obfuscation!

[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
Alcohine...Could he really be in trouble? How so?
And if he is right?
Would the worried chappie be in trouble?[/p][/quote]Not got an answer yet have you. But then why should they take a risk just to answer you.
An ex-policeman, well that narrows the field. Maybe its officer Dibble, he must have retired by now.[/p][/quote]You dont seem to be able to say how the poster in question "could be in trouble" shame and you seemed so sure as well...
You make mention of risk now...any clarification on that?
I try to help a poster and this is what I get...obfuscation!ThisYear

ThisYear wrote: Alcohine...Could he really be in trouble? How so? And if he is right? Would the worried chappie be in trouble?

Not got an answer yet have you. But then why should they take a risk just to answer you. An ex-policeman, well that narrows the field. Maybe its officer Dibble, he must have retired by now.

You dont seem to be able to say how the poster in question &quot;could be in trouble" shame and you seemed so sure as well... You make mention of risk now...any clarification on that? I try to help a poster and this is what I get...obfuscation!

Oh i see, i mistakenly thought you were asking the poster for help.

Has the chappie given you an answer yet?

[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Alcohine...Could he really be in trouble? How so? And if he is right? Would the worried chappie be in trouble?[/p][/quote]Not got an answer yet have you. But then why should they take a risk just to answer you. An ex-policeman, well that narrows the field. Maybe its officer Dibble, he must have retired by now.[/p][/quote]You dont seem to be able to say how the poster in question "could be in trouble" shame and you seemed so sure as well... You make mention of risk now...any clarification on that? I try to help a poster and this is what I get...obfuscation![/p][/quote]Oh i see, i mistakenly thought you were asking the poster for help.
Has the chappie given you an answer yet?Alekhine

ThisYear wrote: Alcohine...Could he really be in trouble? How so? And if he is right? Would the worried chappie be in trouble?

Not got an answer yet have you. But then why should they take a risk just to answer you. An ex-policeman, well that narrows the field. Maybe its officer Dibble, he must have retired by now.

You dont seem to be able to say how the poster in question &quot;could be in trouble" shame and you seemed so sure as well... You make mention of risk now...any clarification on that? I try to help a poster and this is what I get...obfuscation!

Oh i see, i mistakenly thought you were asking the poster for help.

Has the chappie given you an answer yet?

You haven't...not the questions raised by your posts anyway.

[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThisYear[/bold] wrote: Alcohine...Could he really be in trouble? How so? And if he is right? Would the worried chappie be in trouble?[/p][/quote]Not got an answer yet have you. But then why should they take a risk just to answer you. An ex-policeman, well that narrows the field. Maybe its officer Dibble, he must have retired by now.[/p][/quote]You dont seem to be able to say how the poster in question "could be in trouble" shame and you seemed so sure as well... You make mention of risk now...any clarification on that? I try to help a poster and this is what I get...obfuscation![/p][/quote]Oh i see, i mistakenly thought you were asking the poster for help.
Has the chappie given you an answer yet?[/p][/quote]You haven't...not the questions raised by your posts anyway.ThisYear